smedly

19 hours ago, onera1961 said:

It will be interesting to know what CW does to people who did not keep 800K/400K and claim ignorance of the requirements in their next renewal. 

nobody can answer that, some have suggested it will require a restart from scratch, others have suggested that the extension will be technically cancelled from the date you broke the rules and would then be on overstay from that time

Who knows, I don't even think Thai Immigration know which leaves it all open to extreme abuse

Those that have used agents to break the rules think their next extension will be fine - I am not so sure 

On 5/17/2019 at 3:34 PM, eagleo said:

Does anyone know if this reporting can be done at ANY immigration office or does it need to be done at the office that granted the extension?

 

I'll be travelling back to my home country and when i return will not be in the area of that IO for some time.

I think the sensible answer is to stick to the rules and then report to your IO office when you are available to do so, as long as you have adhered to the rules why would there be a problem

I wish people would stop spreading nonsense and inaccurate information on these thread

In case people hadn't noticed people applying for a 12 month extension of permission to stay in Thailand have to meet certain financial requirements "IN THAILAND" - either annual income equal to Bt800k a year or a Bank balance of Bt800k for 5 months not going below Bt400k for 12 months 

Now stop this stupid nonsense now it is getting tiring and it is the same people trolling baiting these threads talking out their ass

18 hours ago, sawadee1947 said:

But if a hospital stay is necessary you want to have it for free or make the runner. 

nobody wants anything for free - if we visit a hospital we pay the bill

what are you taking about - are you Thai

On 5/18/2019 at 12:25 PM, The Theory said:

I guess you need a proof of insurance from next July and I don’t think your US Medicare will be accepted by immigration next time since medicare won’t cover overseas more than a month. If they do accept it, it would be a wonderful news to many O-A holders. 

 

The O-A retirement visa has long since expired and is no longer valid - what the OP was doing was getting a 12 month extension of permission to stay in Thailand, the fact that this was and O-A Visa to begin with is irrelevant - the O-A visa no longer applies in the OP's passport

4 hours ago, SEtonal said:

If denied, the retirement extension process would have to be started over again from scratch with a new Non-Immigrant O visa.

How do you know this ????????????

Stop making statements like this unless you are 100% sure and Immigration have confimed

2 hours ago, jacko45k said:

Effectively, if a person currently on an extension based on money in the bank, wishes to use income the following year, it is a double requirement. At the time of the following year's application, proof of 65,000x12 months, and 400,000 in the bank, total 1.2 million is required. If all goes well, the 400k is then released. (Or does it end at the 10 month point)?

yes, that is why these new rules are extremely flawed

37 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

We had a 3 hour meeting with our senior IO and a senior IO from the regional office.

that is fine if you agreed that in some remote office in northern Thailand - stop advising people in the rest of the country that this arrangement also applies to them - it doesn't 

34 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Maybe some have money trees, others do not.

my pension income continues regardless of my bank balance here or at home

33 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Your advice suggests locking funds in the bank and transferring 65K per month for 12 months.

yes those are the rules for both your current bank balance extension and your future income based extension - both have a very clear set of "different" rules

28 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

No!

No funds are required in your bank for the past year if changing from an extension obtained and based on funds this year and changing to an application based on income next year.

The only requirement for an extension based on income next year, is to prove 12 monthly transfers of 65K.

 

The requirement to keep 800K in the bank for 3 months after your extension is granted, then 400K, the 800K again applies to those who will be applying on the funds in the bank method again, the following year.

 

It is confusing, but I believe you've misinterpreted my statements.

Read the topic https://forum.thaivisa.com/topic/1099485-extension-of-stay-for-retirement/

Although this is the combination method, it clearly states no funds are required to be kept in the bank following the extension being granted.

 

The same applies if your applying for an extension based on income, no funds are required in the bank previous to the date of application.

oh boy are you confused and confusing others

so I will repeat

My advise to anyone that has a new 12 month extension based on bank balance is to stick to the rules for that extension type - 3 month balance of 800k after approval and 400k balance for the following 9 months after approval regardless of how you plan to proceed with your next renewal - even if it is income based - do not listen to people telling you otherwise unless you have 100% confirmed this with you IO and even then be very careful if you decide to go this route and break the rules for your previous bank balance extension 

end of conversation

34 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

We have an expat group and it has been confirmed by our IO that next year, even if you used the funds method this year, provided you show 12 times monthly transfers up to your 2020 extension application, no funds are required to be kept in your Thai bank.

Let me add a few words to the end of that statement that clarifies exactly what you are claiming -

no funds are required to have been kept in your Thai bank for that past year on an extension based on funds in the bank

- that is what you are claiming based on the new rules

The rules state very clearly if you use the income method for a new 12 month extension that no funds 400k (9 months) or 800k (3 months) need to remain in an account post "that" extension renewal - everybody understands that including me

But that is not what you are saying

I think you are confused

My advise to anyone that has a new 12 month extension based on bank balance is to stick to the rules for that extension type - 3 month balance of 800k after approval and 400k balance for the following 9 months after approval regardless of how you plan to proceed with your next renewal - even if it is income based

22 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

For a first time applicant, the rules state must have 800K seasoned for 2 months prior to the date of application. Thereafter the 800K must remain in a Thai bank for 3 months, then half can be withdrawn but the remaining 400K must remain the bank for the remainder of the year.

Some IO's interpret the next part differently;

Some state the funds must be topped up to 800K again 2 months prior to the next application.

Others state the funds must be topped up to 800K again 3 months prior to the next extension, the 2 month rule only applying to first time applications.

you are claiming that the above rules that you have stated will no longer apply to an existing extension attained by the funds in the bank - if you have been transferring 65k baht a month for the year since the issue of that extension based on funds in the bank - that is what your claim is - that is what you are saying your IO told you

and you are interpreting the rules that way also - it is wrong

If you got an extension based on funds in the bank - you must adhere to the rules you have listed above, even if from the date your bank funds based extension was approved you started doing monthly transfers - that does not negate the rules for your previous funds in the bank extension - what part of that are you not getting

honestly I give up - you interpret how you wish and I hope that works for you but be careful what advice you giving to others

20 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Your talking about this current year and yes IO's are supposed to be lenient because many cannot meet the full financial requirement for 2019, due to new and amended orders.

I'm talking about meeting the financial requirements for next year 2020, which was the question posed by the OP in the original post of this topic.

How to change from funds to income for his next extension.

exactly - but if you have used the funds method this year and have not maintained a balance of 400k for 12 months and 800k for 3 months then strictly speaking you have broken those rules as they are written

Yes I know it is all nonsense and very poorly thought through

They should have left the rules generally alone and introduced the income method as I suggested above - everyone maintains a balance of 400k 12months a year and tops it up with either average income or a lump sum totalling 800k a year - simple

11 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

I do not agree with the new order in relation to the funds method for retirement extensions.

BJ made a complete hash of the requirements in my opinion.

I agree with you

But your interpretation is not how they are written - here is a brief on your interpretation

Funds in the bank for renewal (and what about first extension lol)

Must show a balance of at least 400k for the previous 12 months prior to application and also 800k for the 2 months before application and 3 months after last application - that is not how the rules are written and is precisely why they are nonsense - they have tried to solve something and made it worse 

The rules all refer to the current extension not a future one apart from the 2 months seasoning before and the full year of bank transfers

5 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

The seasoning for 3 months after your extension is granted, then 400k for 6/7 months, before topping up to 800k again is in order to comply with the financial requirements based on the funds method for your next extension application. (The financial proof is in arrears).

ask at jomtien and see how that goes

exactly why these rules are nonsense - they are open to interpretation 

and it won't be clear how that is going to work for at least another 9 months

17 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Extensions grant you permission to stay for 1 year in advance, but the financial requirements are based from the previous year in order to grant the extension.

If you can't meet the financial requirements for your next extension, it will be refused.

the new rules changed that

8 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

If you read what I've previously stated, the time to change funds/income is when you are granted your extension based on funds from the previous year, then start the monthly transfers for the following years extension based on income. 12 x monthly transfers. No funds in the bank required.

That has been confirmed by my IO.

If you confirmed this with "your IO" then up to you - it is still not adhering to the rules which are very clear about seasoning after you have been granted an extension based on bank balance

Like I said above - these new rules are complete nonsense and need a rethink 

I have proposed a much simpler method that satisfies all senarios 

Seasoned 400k 12 months a year for everyone no matter what method they use

Making it up to 800k for 3 months prior to renewal

or 

12 month average income transfers of at least 40kbaht a month again equaling a total of 800k for the full year

Simple and workable for all and equals 800k

20 hours ago, Tanoshi said:

You will not be fined or deported, but a further extension will be refused and you'll be expected to leave at the end of your current permission to stay, or given a 7 day extension to depart the Country.

oh really and who told you this ?

How do you know a ban will not be a penalty ?

On 5/8/2019 at 11:20 AM, MikeN said:

Therefore the 400k is a requirement of your current visa extension, not next years ..... BUT a breach of this year’s visa conditions would not look good when applying for an extension next year even if you change to the income method. The good old CATCH-22 !

 I would be keeping the 400k in the bank even if I was changing to the income method next year.....which of course means that you could be eligible for the combo method.

correct

On 5/7/2019 at 8:51 PM, Tanoshi said:

Provided you have 12 x income transfers from the date of your previous extension, then no funds in the bank required.

That is wrong, if previous extension was based on bank balance then you must adhere to the rules for that extension and that means 400k balance for 9 months and 800k balance for 3 months after

If you have then completed the income rules for your next extension 65k x 12 then you are set provided you adhered to the rules set by your previous extension 

as I said in my previous post - these new rules are complete nonsense and unworkable

On 5/7/2019 at 7:30 PM, marcusarelus said:

So when I get my extension next year and change from 800k to the income method I would not have to show proof I complied with the 400k rule all year only that I had 65k coming in every month? 

If you get a 12 month extension based on 800k/400k rules then you must comply with those rules for that extension up until your next extension application, if you then switch to income method then those rules will apply for that extension

How this works in practise will be interesting, IMO the whole thing is one massive Cluster XXXX

2 hours ago, JackThompson said:

I don't think it will stop.   That said, I would not use an agent to "fake-money" this year, if it can be avoided.  Watch and see what is reported next year - and at the office you use - then consider options at that time.

100% agree, very sensible approach and exactly the point I am making, some people think agent use is still in operation as before - yes it is and they will take your money (why not) but come 12 months time - maybe not and it is too late then to do much about it

2 hours ago, stephenterry said:

Not if I go the income route, and my pension documentation on my UK tax return is accepted. Of course I'll get it notarised by a lawyer here in CM, as being genuine. What bugs me more than anything is being required to deposit large sums of money in a commercial bank earning abysmal interest. Any other choice is far preferable.

I agree 

2 hours ago, stephenterry said:

I've never skirted any rules or asked my agent any other that what do I have to produce to comply with the regs?  

then I have absolutely no idea why you are discussing this with me - you very obviously don't quite get the point I was making in my previous posts on this thread

Yes there are some people that use an agent to manage their legal extension application simply because they would rather pay 2k baht to an agent and avoid going to immigration themselves...…..……...that is not what I am referring too when I mention "using an agent", most people understand what that means 

So you have lost me completely as to why we are even discussing this